Australians’ grief and shock over MH17 have overshadowed the inanities of much of the domestic political brawling. Such loss puts all else into perspective – at least temporarily.

For the parents, siblings, children and friends of those killed, that deathly silence and sorrow at the heart of life will be permanent. For Australians in general, the memory of a shared horror will retain its potency.

There is no scale to such pain. No death in such circumstances hurts more or less than any other, is worse or easier to bear. But the sense of empathy for the parents facing the death of their three young children, killed along with their grandfather, haunts the nation as a reminder of the fragility of the most happy of families.

Marite Norris and Anthony Maslin issued a statement from their Western Australian home last week asking for privacy from the media. “There is no story in pain," they said. That sad and meagre wish will hopefully be respected. Even in a world where the lines between the public and the personal are now so blurred, where media of all sorts is constantly available and relentless, where any faith in privacy is a truly relative concept, death is uncompromising.

And it’s true that the momentum of the media will increasingly turn, like its audience, to other very different stories too, trivia and all.

But the country’s response to the loss and coping with its aftermath is now woven into the national political story indefinitely.
Tony Abbott
and
Julie Bishop
as Foreign Minister have ably led that response over the past 10 days, combining personal instinct with professional skill to get worthwhile if limited outcomes.

Sense of surety in response

It’s further evidence of the muddle-headed criticism of Tony Abbott as potential prime minister – that he would lack the ability and agility to represent Australia internationally. Instead, it’s his handling of domestic issues that is causing him such problems, while the combination of Abbott, Bishop and Trade Minister
Andrew Robb
on international issues is proving a great strength.

Related Quotes

Company Profile

Part of that international influence is fortuitous given Australia’s role in chairing the United Nations Security Council, as well as the G20 and the Brisbane meeting of leaders, with or without
Vladimir Putin
, in November. But it also reflects a sense of surety about how best to quickly deal with hard options in Australia’s relations with other countries.

So the government’s insistence that Australia is only interested in securing the Ukrainian site, returning the bodies and getting a full and independent investigation sounds logical and measured. And practical.

The economically conflicted European arguments over whether to impose greater sanctions on Russia will go around and around in the circles at which the Europeans excel. No quick outcome likely there.

Putin’s reign and Pravda-style propaganda may have taken Russia steadily backwards in any claim to being an open, modern society, but his encouragement of a resurgent Russian nationalism remains highly popular. His approval rating is above 80 per cent. The war in eastern Ukraine is regarded as admirable and just, as is the annexation of the Crimea.

And despite years of economic stagnation in Russia, the country’s significance – particularly as a supplier of energy to Europe, as well as a large market for European goods and services – ensures European leaders remain wary of damaging their own economies with new sanctions that have real bite.

Australia’s focus: concrete goals

By contrast, Australia can afford to be purer of purpose and resolve. That’s even if Putin clearly thinks he can deftly out-manoeuvre international outrage by promising to “co-operate" with an inquiry while continuing business as usual at home and abroad.

So while Australia can’t be decisive in that global power struggle, it’s concentrating on tactics to achieve concrete goals.

That was first in gathering support for the UN resolution for an inquiry, now in “Operation Bring Them Home". That makes the reassuring, experienced figure of
Angus Houston
a perfect choice to lead Australia’s mission on the ground in the Ukraine.

Houston’s statement, backed by Abbott, that this will be a humanitarian mission that will not involve the military, was essential in describing the real goal. That’s even if Houston’s description of separatist forces as “professional, co-operative and essentially helpful to our cause" will no doubt grate on Australian ears. Getting results requires diplomatic caution as well as courage.

Abbott says the objective is “to get in, get cracking and get out".

Forensic identification will prove a protracted and difficult process over the next months and probably longer. The Dutch will be leading this, assisted by the Australians. Retrieving justice will be far more elusive. Russia’s view of the workings of an “independent and objective international inquiry" will clearly be different to Australia’s, and that of most others.

It means the grinding reality of dealing with the aftermath of atrocity will underpin the national political agenda for the rest of this year, even as the frenzy of debate over the budget and other domestic issues re-starts this week.

The Labor leadership is aware it cannot be seen as a carping critic of the government on MH17 or in any way compromise the image of national unity. It still wants to attack the government on every other issue. That’s inevitable. But in the midst of all that noise, let’s not forget the silence of pain and of death.